1) Do you any difference between Aristotle's definition of Tragedy and Dryden’s definition of play?
Answer) I find difference between Aristotle's definition of tragedy and Dryden’s definition of the play .
Aristotle's definition :-
" Tragedy , then, is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play ; in the form of action, not of narrative; through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotions . "
Dryden’s definition :-
" A play ought to be a just and lively image of human nature, representing its passions and humours and the changes of the fortune to which it is subject , for the delight and instruction of mankind .
Aristotle's definition of tragedy has three parts . First is lovely image of human nature , second is it represents passions and humour and changes of future. And third is its purpose which gives delight and instructions to mankind . Aristotle's tragedy ends with Catharsis whereas Dryden’s play ends with delight and instruction . I can see other difference between Aristotle's and Dryden’s definition that tragedy has sadness end whereas play has pleasure and delightness end. Tragedy creates seriousness whereas play represents humour.
2) If you are supposed to give your personal predilection, would you be on the side of the Ancient or the modern? Please give reasons .
Answer ) I prefer both Ancient and Modern . Both are true and necessary on its place . We can say that Moderns are still imitating the ancient .
We can say that without roots, tree can't stand and without foundation building can't sustain . So, we can say that all are necessary for eachother progress and newness is necessary to eachother .
Without support of ancient modern cannot grow more. For our more progress oldness and moderness both are necessary . Innovation is important for development of any field .
3) Do you think the arguments presented in favour of the French plays and against English plays are appropriate ? (say for example, Death should not be performed as it is neither just not 'liely' image, displaying duel fight with blunted swords, thousands of soldiers marching represented as five on stage, mingling of mirth and serious , multiple plots etc. )
Answer) French playwright follow the Ancient and favour the unity of time and obsedve it very carefully . In terms of unity of place they are equally sincere. In most of their plays, the entire action is limited to one place. And unity of action is even more obvious ; plays are never congested with sub plots as is the case with English plays. In English plays the character relates to life and therefore, it is proper and reasonable that it should be also in the drama, but in French plays such narrations are more skilled than the Ancients. Dryden portrays the comparative merits and demerits of each in a clearer way . In this essay, as Neander, Dryden favours the violation of those three unities because it leads to the variety in the English plays and these unities have a narrowing and crumpling effects on the French plays, which are often betrayed into absurdities from which the English plays are free. The violation of unities helps the English playwright to present a livelier image of human nature . In his comparison of English and French drama, Neander characterizes the best proofs of the Elizabethan playwrights.
4) What would be hour preference so far as poetic or prosaic dialogue are concerned in the play?
Answer) I prefer poetic dialogue than prosaic in play. Poetic may be rhyme verse or Blank verse also. Poetic dialogues are help for judgement . Rhyme effects on emotions and feelings . Interpretation of poemcan be different. People can read poem with different points of view and different style. Blank verse is poetic prose and it is only fit for comedy. It means we find poetic prose in comedy and use of poetic language audience must get entertainment .
Comments
Post a Comment